Rajasekaran v. The State Rep by, The Inspector of Police
CRL OP/26651/2025 · 2025-10-06
N Sathish Kumar
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 41507 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 41507 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Crl.O.P.No.26651 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 06.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR Crl.O.P.No.26651 of 2025 and Crl.MP.Nos.18080 & 18081 of 2025 Rajasekaran ... Petitioner Vs. 1.State represented by The Inspector of Police Vikravandi Police Station Vizhupuram District 2.Ramalingam ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the records pertaining in C.C.No.169 of 2023 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vikkravandi and quash the same. For Petitioners : Mr.Edwin Jeyakumar For Respondents : Mr.R.Vinothraja for R1 Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER The petitioner seeks to quash the final report in C.C.No.169 of 2023 under Section 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(2) of IPC.
2. Though it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.26651 of 2025 that it is a case in counter filed in a matrimonial dispute, therefore, requires to be quashed. On perusal of the final report, it would indicate that admittedly, there are allegations against the petitioner for causing head injury and medical evidences are also available and this Court is of the view that all these factual aspects cannot be decided in this petition and this Court cannot conduct roving enquiry or mini trial. In this regard, it is relevant to note that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gunmala Sales Private Limited Vs. Anu Mehta and others reported in (2015) 1 SCC 103 has held that High Court cannot conduct a mini trial or roving enquiry in a 482 petition. Such view of the matter, at this stage, this Court is not inclined to quash the final report.
3. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought indulgence of the Court, to dispense with the personal appearance of the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. In view of the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the personal appearance of the petitioner is dispensed with except for receiving copies, for answering the charges, for questioning under section 313 Cr.P.C. and any other dates fixed by the trial Court. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.26651 of 2025 06.10.2025 dhk Neutral Citation:Yes/No To
1. The Judicial Magistrate, Vikkravandi 2.The Inspector of Police Vikravandi Police Station Vizhupuram District 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
N. SATHISH KUMAR
, J.
3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.26651 of 2025 dhk Crl.O.P.No.26651 of 2025 06.10.2025 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis